70

Chapter 4
PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA
This chapter presents the analysis and interpretation of data
gathered in this study.
1. Personal Information/Profile
1.1 Age
Table 2.1
Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Teacher-
Respondents According to Age
Age Frequency Percentage
56-60 years old 3 4.00
51-55 years old 5 6.67
46-50 years old 4 5.33
41-45 years old 15 20.00
36-40 years old 16 21.33
31-35 years old 26 34.67
26-30 years old 5 6.67
21-25 years old 1 1.33
Total 75 100.00
Mean Age: 38.73
The table shows that majority of the respondents belong to the
age bracket of 31 -35 or 34.67 percent of the total number. It
has a mean age of 38.73. This implies that the teacher-
respondents are in their early thirties and that they are
relatively young, vigorous and capable of performing the job.



71

1.2 Gender
Table 2.2
Frequency and Percentage Distribution
of the Respondents as to Gender

Gender Frequency Percentage
Male 6 8.00
Female 69 92.00
Total 75 100.00

Table 2.2 presents the gender of the teacher respondents.
As shown in the table, there are 69 or 92.00 percent female
teachers 6 or 8.00 percent are male science teachers. This is
attributed to the fact that teaching as a profession is
dominated by females.
1.3 Highest Educational Attainment
Table 2.3
Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the Respondents
as to Highest Educational Attainment

Highest Educational
Qualification
Frequency Percentage
BEED 19 25.33
BSED 9 12.00
MaEd 41 54.67
Ph.D 6 8.00
Total 75 100.00

The table shows that 41 or 54.67% are Masters degree holder
and 19 or 25.33% are BEEd graduate. Furthermore, 9 or 12% are
BSEd graduate and only 6 or 8% are Ph.D. graduate. This implies
72

that the respondents are equipped with the necessary knowledge
and skills since they had finished their masters degree.

1.4 Grade Level
Table 2.4
Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the
Respondents as to Grade Level

Grade Level Frequency Percentage
Grade VI 18 24.00
Grade V 21 28.00
Grade IV 13 17.33
Grade III 23 30.67
Total 75 100.00

As shown in the table, 23 or 30.67% are teaching in grade
III and 21 or 28% are teachers of grade V. Moreover, 18 or 24%
are teaching in grade VI and 13 or 17.33% are teachers of grade
IV. It can be said that most of the respondents in this study
are grade III teachers.









73

1.5 Number of Years in Service
Table 2.5
Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the Respondents
as to Number of Years in Service

Number of Years Frequency Percentage
36-40 0 0.00
31-35 2 2.67
26-30 1 1.33
21-25 1 1.33
16-20 8 10.67
11-15 11 14.67
6-10 20 26.67
1-5 32 42.67
Total 75 100.00

As shown in the table, 32 or 42.67% have been teaching for
1-5 years; 20 or 26.67% are teaching for 6-10 years and 11 or
14.67% have been in the teaching profession for 11-15 years.
This implies that the teacher respondents are still young
in the profession.
1.6 Attendance to In-Service trainings and seminars in Science
Table 2.6
Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the Respondents
as to Attendance to In-Service trainings
and seminars in Science

Frequency Percentage
National 12 16.00
Regional 16 21.33
Division 26 34.67
School Level 16 21.33
Others 5 6.67
Total 75 100.00

74

The table reveals that 26 or 34.67% have trainings at the
division level, 16 or 21.33% obtained science trainings at the
regional and school levels, respectively. Moreover, 12 or 16%
have national trainings and 5 or 6.67% obtained their trainings
at other venues.
From this data, it can be inferred that the science
trainings of the respondents have been obtained at the division
level.
This implies that the respondents are provided with
opportunities to upgrade their skills and gain more knowledge
through these seminars thus ensuring quality instruction on
their part as teachers.
1.7 School Assignment
Table 2.7
Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the Respondents
as to School Assignment
School Assignment Frequency Percentage
Tuguegarao East Central School 17 22.67
Tuguegarao West Central School 12 16.00
Tuguegarao North Central School 12 16.00
Tuguegarao Northeast Central
School
7 9.33
Annafunan Elementary School 12 16.00
Linao Elementary School 5 6.67
Cataggamman Elementary School 10 13.33
Total 75 100

75

The table shows the distribution of teacher-respondents in
the four district in the Division of Tuguegarao City.
There are 12 or 22.67% assigned in Tuguegarao East Central
School, 12 or 16.00% in Tuguegarao West Central School,
Tuguegarao North Central School and Annafunan Elementary School.
7 or 9.33% from Tuguegarao 10 or 13.33% and 5 or 6.67% from
Linao Elementary School and Cataggamman Elementary School
respectively.

1.7 Number of Subject Preparation
Table 2.8
Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the Respondents
as to Number of Subject Preparation
Number of Subject Preparation Frequency Percentage
1 4 5.33
2 11 14.67
3 24 32.00
4 36 48.00
Total 75 100.00

As shown in the table, 36 or 48% have 4 subject
preparations, 24 or 32% have 3 preparations, 11 or 14.67% have 2
subject preparation and 4 or 5.33% have 1 preparation. It can be
inferred that most of the respondents have 4 preparations which
is generally the case in the elementary level because of the
lack of teachers vis--vis the growing number of pupils.

76

2.1 Personal Science Teaching Efficacy
Table 3.1
Mean and Descriptive Interpretation on the
Level of Science Teaching Self Efficiency
of the Respondents

Items Teachers School Heads Item Mean
A. Personal Science Teaching Self Efficacy Mean D.I. Mean D.I.
1. I am continually finding better ways to teach science 4.63 Very
high
4.66 Very
high
4.65
2. I teach science as well as i can teach other subjects. 4.36 Very
high
4.44 Very
high
4.40
3. I know the steps to teach science concepts
effectively.
3.95 High 4.16 High 4.06
4. I am very effective in monitoring science activities 3.84 High 4.06 High 3.95
5. I generally teach science effectively 3.92 High 4.12 High 4.02
6. I understand science concepts well enough to be
effective in teaching elementary science.
4.04 High 4.25 Very
high
4.15
7. I find it easy to use manipulative to explain to
students why science works.
4.04 High 4.30 Very
high
4.17
8. I am typically able to answer students science
questions.
4.18 High 4.36 Very
high
4.27
9. I am confident that i have the necessary skills to
teach science
4.00 High 4.29 Very
high
4.15
10. When a student has difficulty in understanding
science concept, I am competent on how to help the
students understand it better
4.00 High 4.30 Very
high
4.15
11. When teaching science, I usually welcome student
questions
4.32 Very
high
4.48 Very
high
4.4
12. I know what to do to turn students on to science 3.92 High 4.31 Very
high
4.12
Over-all Mean 4.10 High 4.31 Very
high
4.21

The table shows that the two groups of respondents have the
same assessment with each other. Item 1 I am continually
finding better ways to teach science is the highest with a
category mean of 4.65 or very high. On the other hand the item
I am very effective in monitoring science activities is the
lowest with a category mean of 3.84.
77

This implies that the teacher respondents are continually
adopting different strategies suited to the level of the pupils
to make teaching and learning in science more effective.

2.2 Science Teaching Outcomes Expectancy
Table 3.2
Mean and Descriptive Interpretation on the
Level of Science Teaching Outcome
Expectancy of the Respondents

Items Teachers School Heads Item
Mean
Science Teaching Outcomes Expectancy Mean D.I. Mean D.I.
1. When a student does better than usual in science, it is
often because the teacher exerted much effort
4.13 High 4.39 Very high
4.26
2. When the science grades of the students improve, it is
often due to their teachers having found a more
effective teaching approach..
4.21 Very
high
4.36 Very high 4.29
3. If students are achieving in science, it is most likely due
to effective science teaching.
4.25 Very
high
4.43 Very high 4.34
4. The inadequacy of a students science background can
be overcome by good teaching
4.25 Very
high
4.40 Very high 4.33
5. The low science achievement of students cannot be
blamed on their teachers
4.00 High 4.38 Very high 4.19
6. When a low-achieving child progresses in science, it is
usually due to extra attention given by the teacher
4.03 High 4.09 high 4.06
7. Increased effort in science tecahing produces change in
students science achievement.
4.21 Very
high
4.29 Very high 4.25
8. The teacher is generally responsible for the
achievement of students in science
4.09 High 4.17 High 4.13
9. Students achievement in science is directly related to
their teachers effectiveness in science teaching
4.03 High 4.13 High 4.08
10. If parents comment that their child is showing more
interest in school, it is because of good performance of
the childs teacher
3.99 High 4.21 Very high 4.10
11. Given a choice, I would invite the principal to evaluate
my science teaching.
4.09 High 4.31 Very high 4.20
Over-all Mean 4.17 High 4.30 Very high 4.24

78

The table shows that the items If students are achieving
in science, it is most likely due to effective science
teaching, and The inadequacy of a students science background
can be overcome by good teaching, was rated by the teacher
respondents the highest with an item mean of 4.25 or very high
self efficacy while the lowest is item 10 When a low-achieving
child progresses in science, it is usually due to extra
attention given by the teacher.
On the other hand item 3, If students are achieving in
science, it is most likely due to effective science teaching,
was rated by the school head as the highest with an item mean of
4.43 or very high and the item When a low-achieving child
progresses in science, it is usually due to extra attention
given by the teacher, is the lowest with an item mean of 4.09
or high.
The item If students are achieving in science, it is most
likely due to effective science teaching was rated the highest
with a category mean of 4.34 or very high and the lowest is item
When a low-achieving child progresses in science, it is usually
due to extra attention given by the teacher with a category
mean of 4.06 or high.
This implies that teachers effectiveness and efficiency in
teaching science can encourage pupils to do better and to have
an outstanding performance.
79

Summary of Mean and Descriptive Interpretation of Science
Teaching Self-Efficacy

Category Teacher School Head
Category
Mean
Descriptive
Interpretation
Category
Mean
Descriptive
Interpretat
ion
A. Personal Science
Teaching
Efficacy
4.10 High 4.31 Very high
B. Science Teaching
Outcomes
Expectancy
4.17 High 4.30 Very high

The table presents the summary on the assessment of the
teachers and school heads on the personal science teaching
efficacy and science teaching outcomes expectancy. The teachers
rated both categories are high with means of 4.10 and 4.17,
respectively.
On the other hand, the school heads rated these two
categories very high.
This implies that the teachers are very conservative in
their assessment.






80

3. Test of significant difference of the assessment of the two
groups of respondents
Table 4
t-test results on the assessment of the Two Groups of
Respondents
Categories Mean
Adminis
trators
Teachers t-test Probability Decision
1. Personal
Science
Teaching
Efficacy
4.31 4.1008 6.4301 3.769E-05 Reject Ho
at .05
level
2. Science
Teaching
Outcomes
Expectancy
4.3000 4.12 7.4485 6.398E-06 Reject Ho
at .05
level

A comparison on the assessment of the two groups of
respondents is shown in table 4. The categories on personal
science teaching efficacy and science teaching outcomes
expectancy reveal that there is significant difference on the
assessment of both groups of respondents, hence, the rejection
of the null hypothesis at .05 level.
This means that the administrators/school heads assessed
significantly better/higher than the teachers on the two
categories.



81

4. Level of the teaching performance of the teacher respondents
as reflected in their PAST

Table 5

Frequency, Percentage Distribution on the Teaching Performance
Of the Teacher Respondents as Reflected in their
PAST S.Y. 2012-2013

Frequency Percentage Mean
8.60-10.00 1 1.33
7.5644
Very
Satisfactory
6.60-8.59 72 96.00
4.60-6.59 2 2.67
2.60-4.59 0 0.00
2.59-below 0 0.00
Total 75 100.00

The table above reveals that there are 72 respondents who
got a performance of very satisfactory, while there is only 1
who obtained a perfect grade of 10 which means outstanding.
The over-all mean of 7.5644 implies that majority of the
respondents obtained a very satisfactory performance.









82

5. Test of significant Relationship Between the Science Teaching
Efficacy of the Teacher Respondents and their Teaching
Performance

Table 6
Pearson-r Results on the Relationship Between the Science
Teaching Self Efficacy of the Teacher Respondents
and their Teaching Performance

Items r Critical Value Decision
1. I am continually finding better ways to teach science .06810 .22701 Accept Ho at .05
level
2. I teach science as well as i can teach other subjects. .07385 .22701 Accept Ho at .05
level
3. I know the steps to teach science concepts effectively. .07488 .22701 Accept Ho at .05
level
4. I am very effective in monitoring science activities .21001 .22701 Accept Ho at .05
level
5. I generally teach science effectively .04594 .22701 Accept Ho at .05
level
6. I understand science concepts well enough to be
effective in teaching elementary science.
.04047 .22701 Accept Ho at .05
level
7. I find it easy to use manipulative to explain to students
why science works.
.14285 .22701 Accept Ho at .05
level
8. I am typically able to answer students science
questions.
-.06410 .22701 Accept Ho at .05
level
9. I am confident that i have the necessary skills to teach
science
-.02355 .22701 Accept Ho at .05
level
10. When a student has difficulty in understanding science
concept, I am competent on how to help the students
understand it better
-.02944 .22701 Accept Ho at .05
level
11. When teaching science, I usually welcome student
questions
-.01742 .22701 Accept Ho at .05
level
12. I know what to do to turn students on to science .01922 .22701 Accept Ho at .05
level

The results indicate that there is no significant
relationship between teaching efficiency of the teacher
respondents and their teaching performance, hence the acceptance
of the null hypothesis at .05 level.
83

This means the teaching performance of the teachers do
not affect their science teaching efficiency.

6. Mean Grade of the Grade 6 pupils in Science


Table 7

Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the
Mean Grade of Grade 6 Pupils

Grade Frequency Percentage Mean
92-94 76 5.78


85.38

89-91 114 8.67
86-88 361 27.45
83-85 578 43.95
80-82 171 13.00
77-79 4 0.31
74-76 11 0.84
Total 1315 100.00

Mean Grade = 85.38 Proficient
The table shows that 578 or 43.95% out of 1315 grade six
pupils obtained a grade ranging from 83-85, 361 or 27.45%
obtained a grade of 86-88, 171 or 13.00% obtained a grade of 80-
82, 114 pupils obtained a grade of 89-91, 11 got a grade of 74-
76 and there are 4 or .31% obtained a grade ranging from 77-79.
The Mean Grade of the grade six pupils is 85.38.
This implies that the grade six pupils from the four
Central Schools and 3 big non-central schools are proficient in
science subject.

84


7. Test of significant relationship Between Teaching Science
Efficiency and the Mean Grade of Pupils




Table 8

Pearson r Results on the Relationship Between Teaching Self
Efficacy and the Mean Grade of Pupils

Item r Critical
value .05
Decision
1. I am continually finding better ways to teach science -.02605 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
2. I teach science as well as i can teach other subjects -.07346 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
3. I know the steps to teach science concepts effectively. -.03421 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
4. I am very effective in monitoring science activities -.03160 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
5. I generally teach science effectively -.04341 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
6. I understand science concepts well enough to be
effective in teaching elementary science.
-.06858 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
7. I find it easy to use manipulative to explain to students
why science works.
.05166 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
8. I am typically able to answer students science
questions.
-.07020 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
9. I am confident that i have the necessary skills to teach
science
-.07632 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
10. When a student has difficulty in understanding science
concept, I am competent on how to help the students
understand it better
-.06311 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
11. When teaching science, i usually welcome student
questions
-.08656 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
12. I know what to do to turn students on to science -.02136 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level

The above table presents the r results on the
relationship between teaching science efficacy of the teacher
respondents and the mean grade of the pupils. Looking closely at
the results indicate that the r values are very low ranging from
85

-.02 to -.07. This means that the computed r is lower than the
critical value of .22701, thus accepting the null hypothesis at
.05 level.
This implies that Science Teaching Efficiency do not
affect the performance/grade of the pupils.

8. Test of Relationships Between the Teaching Performance
Of the Teacher-Respondents and the Mean Grade of the Pupils

Table 9
Pearson-r Results on the Relationships Between the Teaching
Performance Of the Teacher-Respondents and the Mean Grade of the
Pupils

Grade/PAST r Critical Value Decision

Performance vs. Grade

-.07231

.22701

Accept Ho at
.05 level

The Pearson r of -.07231 indicates that this value falls
short if the critical value at .05 level, thus accepting the
null hypothesis at .05 level. This means that performance rating
of the teachers do not affect the grades or performance of the
Grade 6 pupils.








86



9.1.1 Test of significant Relationship Between Personal Science
Teaching Efficacy and Age


Table 10.1.1

Pearson-r Results on the Relationship Between Personal Science
Teaching Efficacy and Age

Item r Critical
value .05
Decision
A. Personal Science Teaching Efficacy
1. I am continually finding better ways to teach science .17668 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
2. I teach science as well as i can teach other subjects. .10360 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
3. I know the steps to teach science concepts
effectively.
.08334 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
4. I am very effective in monitoring science activities .20509 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
5. I generally teach science effectively .13555 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
6. I understand science concepts well enough to be
effective in teaching elementary science.
.11199 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
7. I find it easy to use manipulative to explain to
students why science works.
.22360 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
8. I am typically able to answer students science
questions.
.10120 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
9. I am confident that i have the necessary skills to
teach science
.16268 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
10. When a student has difficulty in understanding
science concept, I am competent on how to help the
students understand it better
.08835 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
11. When teaching science, I usually welcome student
questions
.03685 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
12. I know what to do to turn students on to science .20986 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
The above table reveals that age is not significantly
related to science teaching efficacy in all the items, hence the
acceptance of the null hypothesis at .05 level.
87

This implies that the age does not affect teaching self-
efficacy of the teacher.

9.1.2 Test of significant Relationship Between Personal Science
Teaching Efficacy and Gender

Table 10.1.2

Pearson-r Results on the Relationship Between Personal Science
Teaching Efficacy and Gender

Item r Critical
value .05
Decision
A. Personal Science Teaching Efficacy
1. I am continually finding better ways to teach
science
-.14304 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
2. I teach science as well as i can teach other
subjects.
-.08056 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
3. I know the steps to teach science concepts
effectively.
-.18000 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
4. I am very effective in monitoring science
activities
-.32843 .22701 Reject Ho at .05 level
5. I generally teach science effectively -.26067 .22701 Reject Ho at .05 level
6. I understand science concepts well enough to be
effective in teaching elementary science.
-.29506 .22701 Reject Ho at .05 level
7. I find it easy to use manipulative to explain to
students why science works.
-.20917 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
8. I am typically able to answer students science
questions.
-.30096 .22701 Reject Ho at .05 level
9. I am confident that i have the necessary skills to
teach science
-.32275 .22701 Reject Ho at .05 level
10. When a student has difficulty in understanding
science concept, I am competent on how to help
the students understand it better
-.30382 .22701 Reject Ho at .05 level
11. When teaching science, I usually welcome
student questions
-.18118 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
12. I know what to do to turn students on to science -.26067 .22701 Reject Ho at .05 level
Science teaching self efficacy is significantly related to
gender on items 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10 and 12, hence the rejection of
88

the null hypothesis at .05 level. This means that gender affects
teaching efficacy on the items mentioned above.
On the other hand, there is no significant relationship
between gender and teaching efficacy on items 1, 2, 3, 7 and 10,
hence the acceptance of the null hypothesis at .05 level.

9.1.3 Test of significant Relationship Between Personal Science
Teaching Efficacy and Highest Educational Qualification

Table 10.1.3

Pearson-r Results on the Relationship Between Personal Science
Teaching Efficacy and Highest Educational Qualification
Item r Critical
value .05
Decision
A. Personal Science Teaching Efficacy
1. I am continually finding better ways to teach science -.19844 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
2. I teach science as well as i can teach other subjects. .03684 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
3. I know the steps to teach science concepts effectively. -.02938 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
4. I am very effective in monitoring science activities -.01509 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
5. I generally teach science effectively -.11282 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
6. I understand science concepts well enough to be effective
in teaching elementary science.
.08812 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
7. I find it easy to use manipulative to explain to students
why science works.
.08477 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
8. I am typically able to answer students science questions. .06122 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
9. I am confident that i have the necessary skills to teach
science
.0000 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
10. When a student has difficulty in understanding science
concept, I am competent on how to help the students
understand it better
-.04236 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
11. When teaching science, I usually welcome student
questions
-.06736 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
12. I know what to do to turn students on to science .01721 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
89

The educational qualifications of the teachers is not
significantly related to personal teaching science efficacy,
hence the acceptance of the null hypothesis in all the items on
this criteria.
This means that educational qualification do not affect the
personal teaching efficacy of the teachers.
9.1.4 Test of significant Relationship Personal Science Teaching
Efficacy and Grade Level

Table 10.1.4

Pearson-r Results on the Relationship Between Personal Science
Teaching Efficacy and Grade Level

Item r Critical
value .05
Decision
A. Personal Science Teaching Efficacy
1. I am continually finding better ways to teach science -.30950 .22701 Reject Ho at .05 level
2. I teach science as well as i can teach other subjects. -0.4770 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
3. I know the steps to teach science concepts effectively. -.26195 .22701 Reject Ho at .05 level
4. I am very effective in monitoring science activities -.29905 .22701 Reject Ho at .05 level
5. I generally teach science effectively -.17211 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
6. I understand science concepts well enough to be
effective in teaching elementary science.
-.17271 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
7. I find it easy to use manipulative to explain to students
why science works.
-.30078 .22701 Reject Ho at .05 level
8. I am typically able to answer students science
questions.
-.31729 .22701 Reject Ho at .05 level
9. I am confident that i have the necessary skills to teach
science
-.29912 .22701 Reject Ho at .05 level
10. When a student has difficulty in understanding science
concept, I am competent on how to help the students
understand it better
-.23465 .22701 Reject Ho at .05 level
11. When teaching science, I usually welcome student
questions
-.27442 .22701 Reject Ho at .05 level
12. I know what to do to turn students on to science -.23132 .22701 Reject Ho at .05 level

90

The relationship between Science teaching efficacy and
grade level reveals that items I teach science as well as i can
teach other subjects, I generally teach science effectively,
and I understand science concepts well enough to be effective
in teaching elementary science, do not show any significant
relationship to science teaching efficacy, thus accepting the
null hypothesis at .05 level.
On the other hand, items 1,3,4 7,8,9,10,11 and 12 show
significant relationship science teaching efficacy, thus the
rejection of the null hypothesis.

9.1.5 Test of significant Relationship Between Personal Science
Teaching Efficacy and Number of Years Teaching Science

Table 10.1.5

Pearson-r Results on the Relationship Between Personal Science
Teaching Efficacy and Number of Years Teaching Science

Item r Critical
value .05
Decision
A. Personal Science Teaching Efficacy
13. I am continually finding better ways to teach science -.07349 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
14. I teach science as well as i can teach other subjects. .23248 .22701 Reject Ho at .05 level
15. I know the steps to teach science concepts effectively. -.02763 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
16. I am very effective in monitoring science activities .03814 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
17. I generally teach science effectively .09825 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
18. I understand science concepts well enough to be
effective in teaching elementary science.
.04086 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
19. I find it easy to use manipulative to explain to students
why science works.
.00761 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
91

20. I am typically able to answer students science
questions.
-.01193 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
21. I am confident that i have the necessary skills to teach
science
-.04109 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
22. When a student has difficulty in understanding science
concept, I am competent on how to help the students
understand it better
.00000 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
23. When teaching science, I usually welcome student
questions
-.09867 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
24. I know what to do to turn students on to science -.04815 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level

The number of years teaching science is significantly
related to teach science as I can teach other subject, hence
the rejection of the null hypothesis.
On the other hand, all the other items on this category
is not significantly related to numbers of years in teaching
science, thus accepting the null hypothesis in 11 items of this
category.

9.1.6 Test of significant Relationship Between Personal Science
Teaching Efficacy and Attendance to In-Service Training and
Seminars in School

Table 10.1.6

Pearson-r Results on the Relationship Between Personal Science
Teaching Efficacy and Attendance to In-Service Training and
Seminars in School

Item r Critical
value .05
Decision
A. Personal Science Teaching Efficacy
1. I am continually finding better ways to teach science -.12484 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
2. I teach science as well as i can teach other subjects. -.12226 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
3. I know the steps to teach science concepts effectively. -.18173 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
92

4. I am very effective in monitoring science activities -.11849 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
5. I generally teach science effectively -.14282 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
6. I understand science concepts well enough to be effective
in teaching elementary science.
-.19178 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
7. I find it easy to use manipulative to explain to students why
science works.
-.30177 .22701 Reject Ho at .05 level
8. I am typically able to answer students science questions. -.14303 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
9. I am confident that i have the necessary skills to teach
science
.15200 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
10. When a student has difficulty in understanding science
concept, I am competent on how to help the students
understand it better
.07949 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
11. When teaching science, I usually welcome student
questions
-.22754 .22701 Reject Ho at .05 level
12. I know what to do to turn students on to science -.16298 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level

The relationship between teaching science efficacy and
attendance to seminars reveals that of the 12 items on teaching
science efficacy, ten items do not show any significant
relationship to science teaching efficacy, thus accepting the
null hypothesis at .05 level.
On the other hand, the items on I find it easy to use
manipulative to explain to student why science work and When
teaching science, I usually welcome students questions show
significant relationship to attendance to trainings and seminars
in science, hence, the rejection of the null hypothesis at .05
level.
The findings imply that attendance to trainings and
seminars do not affect the teaching science efficacy of the
teacher respondents.
93

9.1.7 Test of significant Relationship Between Personal Science
Teaching Efficacy and School Assignment

Table 10.1.7

Pearson-r Results on the Relationship Between Personal Science
Teaching Efficacy and School Assignment

Item r Critical
value .05
Decision
A. Personal Science Teaching Efficacy
1. I am continually finding better ways to teach science .17659 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
2. I teach science as well as i can teach other subjects. -.10099 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
3. I know the steps to teach science concepts effectively. -.05781 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
4. I am very effective in monitoring science activities -.06738 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
5. I generally teach science effectively -.07541 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
6. I understand science concepts well enough to be
effective in teaching elementary science.
-.13028 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
7. I find it easy to use manipulative to explain to students
why science works.
-.08212 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
8. I am typically able to answer students science
questions.
-.24049 .22701 Reject Ho at .05 level
9. I am confident that i have the necessary skills to teach
science
-.18673 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
10. When a student has difficulty in understanding science
concept, I am competent on how to help the students
understand it better
-.14282 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
11. When teaching science, I usually welcome student
questions
-.25988 .22701 Reject Ho at .05 level
12. I know what to do to turn students on to science -.15303 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level

The relationship between teaching science efficacy and
school assignment illustrates that very few items were
significant at .05 level. These are I am typically able to
answer students science questions, and When teaching science,
I usually welcome student questions, thus rejecting the null
94

hypothesis on these items. This means that school assignments
affect teaching science efficacy on the items mentioned.
However, 10 items were not significantly related to school
assignment, thus accepting the null hypothesis at .05 level.


9.1.8 Test of significant Relationship Between Personal Science
Teaching Efficacy and Number of Subject Preparations

Table 10.1.8

Relationship Between Personal Science Teaching
Efficacy and Number of Subject Preparations

Item r Critical
value .05
Decision
A. Personal Science Teaching Efficacy
1. I am continually finding better ways to teach science .01814 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
2. I teach science as well as i can teach other subjects. .05562 .22701 Reject Ho at .05 level
3. I know the steps to teach science concepts effectively. -.13158 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
4. I am very effective in monitoring science activities -.17370 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
5. I generally teach science effectively -.26617 .22701 Reject Ho at .05 level
6. I understand science concepts well enough to be
effective in teaching elementary science.
-.24812 .22701 Reject Ho at .05 level
7. I find it easy to use manipulative to explain to students
why science works.
-.26327 .22701 Reject Ho at .05 level
8. I am typically able to answer students science
questions.
-.39805 .22701 Reject Ho at .05 level
9. I am confident that i have the necessary skills to teach
science
-.29710 .22701 Reject Ho at .05 level
10. When a student has difficulty in understanding science
concept, I am competent on how to help the students
understand it better
-.24971 .22701 Reject Ho at .05 level
11. When teaching science, I usually welcome student
questions
-.21741 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
12. I know what to do to turn students on to science -.24096 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level

95

The relationship between science teaching efficacy and the
number of subject preparation reveals that on the 12 items on
personal science teaching efficacy, 6 items do not show any
significant relationship to science teaching efficacy, thus
accepting the null hypothesis at .05 level.
On the other hand, 6 items show significant relationship to
number of subject preparation, hence, the rejection of the null
hypothesis at .05 level.
The findings imply that the number of subject preparations
do not affect the science teaching self efficacy of the teacher
respondents.

9.2.1 Test of significant Relationship Between Science Teaching
Outcomes Expectancy and Age

Table 10.2.1

Pearson r Results on the Relationship Between Science Teaching
Outcomes Expectancy and Age

Item r Critical
value .05
Decision
B. Science Teaching Outcomes Expectancy
1. When a student does better than usual in science, it
is often because the teacher exerted much effort
-.00680 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
2. When the science grades of the students improve, it
is often due to their teachers having found a more
effective teaching approach..
-.02322 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
3. If students are achieving in science, it is most likely
due to effective science teaching.
-.07373 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
4. The inadequacy of a students science background
can be overcome by good teaching
.10361 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
5. The low science achievement of students cannot be
blamed on their teachers
.21822 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
6. When a low-achieving child progresses in science,
it is usually due to extra attention given by the
.30587 .22701 Reject Ho at .05 level
96

teacher
7. Increased effort in science tecahing produces
change in students science achievement.
.08013 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
8. The teacher is generally responsible for the
achievement of students in science
.211E58 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
9. Students achievement in science is directly related
to their teachers effectiveness in science teaching
.21305 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
10. If parents comment that their child is showing more
interest in school, it is because of good
performance of the childs teacher
.06768 .22701 Reject Ho at .05 level
11. Given a choice, I would invite the principal to
evaluate my science teaching.
.13257 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level

The Pearson r results show that the item When a low-
achieving child progresses in science, it is usually due to
extra attention given by the teacher, has an r of .30587 which
is significant at .05 level, hence the rejection of the null
hypothesis at .05 level. This means that age affects this item.
On the other hand, all the other items do not signify
significant relationship, thus accepting the null hypothesis.

9.2.2 Test of significant Relationship Between Science Teaching
Outcomes Expectancy and Gender

Table 10.2.2

Pearson r Results on the Relationship Between Science Teaching
Outcomes Expectancy and Gender

Item r Critical
value .05
Decision
B. Science Teaching Outcomes
Expectancy

1. When a student does better than usual in
science, it is often because the teacher
-.21926 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
97

exerted much effort
2. When the science grades of the students
improve, it is often due to their teachers
having found a more effective teaching
approach..
-.21248 .22701 Reject Ho at .05 level
3. If students are achieving in science, it is
most likely due to effective science
teaching.
-.19940 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
4. The inadequacy of a students science
background can be overcome by good
teaching
-.21525 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
5. The low science achievement of students
cannot be blamed on their teachers
-.18009 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
6. When a low-achieving child progresses in
science, it is usually due to extra attention
given by the teacher
-.34443 .22701 Reject Ho at .05 level
7. Increased effort in science tecahing
produces change in students science
achievement.
-.27895 .22701 Reject Ho at .05 level
8. The teacher is generally responsible for the
achievement of students in science
-.24061 .22701 Reject Ho at .05 level
9. Students achievement in science is directly
related to their teachers effectiveness in
science teaching
-.07165 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
10. If parents comment that their child is
showing more interest in school, it is
because of good performance of the childs
teacher
-.07673 .22701 Accept Ho at .05 level
11. Given a choice, I would invite the principal
to evaluate my science teaching.
-.24061 .22701 Reject Ho at .05 level

Gender is significantly related to the following items: 6,
7, 8 and 11, thus rejecting the null hypothesis at .05 level.
On the other hand, there is no significant relationship
between gender and items 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 9 and 10, thus accepting
the null hypothesis at .05 level.

98

9.2.3 Test of significant Relationship Between Science Teaching
Outcomes Expectancy and Highest Educational Qualification

Table 10.2.3

Pearson r Results on the Relationship Between Science Teaching
Outcomes Expectancy and Highest Educational Qualification

Item r Critical
value .05
Decision
B. Science Teaching Outcomes Expectancy
1. When a student does better than usual in science, it is
often because the teacher exerted much effort
.03008 .22701 Accept Ho at
.05 level
2. When the science grades of the students improve, it is
often due to their teachers having found a more
effective teaching approach..
.03945 .22701 Accept Ho at
.05 level
3. If students are achieving in science, it is most likely
due to effective science teaching.
.03154 .22701 Accept Ho at
.05 level
4. The inadequacy of a students science background can
be overcome by good teaching
.05860 .22701 Accept Ho at
.05 level
5. The low science achievement of students cannot be
blamed on their teachers
.26670 .22701 Reject Ho at
.05 level
6. When a low-achieving child progresses in science, it is
usually due to extra attention given by the teacher
.17858 .22701 Accept Ho at
.05 level
7. Increased effort in science tecahing produces change
in students science achievement.
.11108 .22701 Accept Ho at
.05 level
8. The teacher is generally responsible for the
achievement of students in science
.08124 .22701 Accept Ho at
.05 level
9. Students achievement in science is directly related to
their teachers effectiveness in science teaching
.15705 .22701 Accept Ho at
.05 level
10. If parents comment that their child is showing more
interest in school, it is because of good performance of
the childs teacher
.07745 .22701 Accept Ho at
.05 level
11. Given a choice, I would invite the principal to evaluate
my science teaching.
.18740 .22701 Accept Ho at
.05 level

99

Educational Attainment is significantly related to The low
science achievement of students cannot be blamed on their
teachers, thus rejecting the null hypothesis at .05 level.
All other items do not show significant relationship to
educational attainment, thus accepting the null hypothesis at
.05 level.
9.2.4 Test of significant Relationship Between Science Teaching
Outcomes Expectancy and Grade Level

Table 10.2.4

Pearson r Results on the Relationship Between Science Teaching
Outcomes Expectancy and Number of Years in Service



Item r Critical
value .05
Decision
B. Science Teaching Outcomes Expectancy
1. When a student does better than usual in science, it
is often because the teacher exerted much effort
.00903 .22701 Accept Ho at
.05 level
2. When the science grades of the students improve, it
is often due to their teachers having found a more
effective teaching approach..
-.01392 .22701 Accept Ho at
.05 level
3. If students are achieving in science, it is most likely
due to effective science teaching.
-.00726 .22701 Accept Ho at
.05 level
4. The inadequacy of a students science background
can be overcome by good teaching
-.06866 .22701 Accept Ho at
.05 level
5. The low science achievement of students cannot be
blamed on their teachers
-.13909 .22701 Accept Ho at
.05 level
6. When a low-achieving child progresses in science,
it is usually due to extra attention given by the
teacher
-.22034 .22701 Accept Ho at
.05 level
7. Increased effort in science tecahing produces
change in students science achievement.
-.21414 .22701 Accept Ho at
100

.05 level
8. The teacher is generally responsible for the
achievement of students in science
-.06709 .22701 Accept Ho at
.05 level
9. Students achievement in science is directly related
to their teachers effectiveness in science teaching
.01930 .22701 Accept Ho at
.05 level
10. If parents comment that their child is showing more
interest in school, it is because of good performance
of the childs teacher
.04716 .22701 Accept Ho at
.05 level
11. Given a choice, I would invite the principal to
evaluate my science teaching.
-.10215 .22701 Accept Ho at
.05 level

Grade level is not significantly related to personal
teaching efficacy, hence the acceptance of the null hypothesis
in all the items on this category.
This means that grade level do not affect the science
teaching outcomes expectancy.


9.2.5 Test of significant Relationship Between Science Teaching
Outcomes Expectancy and Number of Years in Service

Table 10.2.5

Pearson r Results on the Relationship Between Science Teaching
Outcomes Expectancy and Number of Years in Service

Item r Critical
value .05
Decision
C. Science Teaching Outcomes Expectancy
12. When a student does better than usual in science, it
is often because the teacher exerted much effort
-.01193 .22701 Accept Ho at
.05 level
13. When the science grades of the students improve, it
is often due to their teachers having found a more
effective teaching approach..
-.04109 .22701 Accept Ho at
.05 level
101

14. If students are achieving in science, it is most likely
due to effective science teaching.
.00000 .22701 Accept Ho at
.05 level
15. The inadequacy of a students science background
can be overcome by good teaching
-.09867 .22701 Accept Ho at
.05 level
16. The low science achievement of students cannot be
blamed on their teachers
-.04815 .22701 Accept Ho at
.05 level
17. When a low-achieving child progresses in science,
it is usually due to extra attention given by the
teacher
.06420 .22701 Accept Ho at
.05 level
18. Increased effort in science tecahing produces
change in students science achievement.
.02398 .22701 Accept Ho at
.05 level
19. The teacher is generally responsible for the
achievement of students in science
.01610 .22701 Accept Ho at
.05 level
20. Students achievement in science is directly related
to their teachers effectiveness in science teaching
.13434 .22701 Accept Ho at
.05 level
21. If parents comment that their child is showing more
interest in school, it is because of good performance
of the childs teacher
.12419 .22701 Accept Ho at
.05 level
22. Given a choice, I would invite the principal to
evaluate my science teaching.
.13996 .22701 Accept Ho at
.05 level

The Pearson r results show that all items do not signify
significant relationship to the number of years in service, thus
accepting the null hypothesis at .05 level.
This implies that the number of years in service of the teacher
respondents does not affect the science teaching outcomes
expectancy.




102

9.2.6 Test of significant Relationship Between Science Teaching
Outcomes Expectancy and Attendance to In Service
Training/Seminars in School

Table 10.2.6

Pearson r Results on the Relationship Between Science Teaching
Outcomes Expectancy and Attendance to In Service
Training/Seminars in School

Item r Critical
value .05
Decision
B. Science Teaching Outcomes Expectancy
1. When a student does better than usual in science, it is
often because the teacher exerted much effort
-.08835 .22701 Accept Ho
at .05 level
2. When the science grades of the students improve, it is
often due to their teachers having found a more
effective teaching approach..
-.09502 .22701 Accept Ho
at .05 level
3. If students are achieving in science, it is most likely due
to effective science teaching.
-.10409 .22701 Accept Ho
at .05 level
4. The inadequacy of a students science background can
be overcome by good teaching
-.09176 .22701 Accept Ho
at .05 level
5. The low science achievement of students cannot be
blamed on their teachers
.00000 .22701 Accept Ho
at .05 level
6. When a low-achieving child progresses in science, it is
usually due to extra attention given by the teacher
-.23381 .22701 Accept Ho
at .05 level
7. Increased effort in science tecahing produces change in
students science achievement.
-.12474 .22701 Accept Ho
at .05 level
8. The teacher is generally responsible for the achievement
of students in science
-.07845 .22701 Accept Ho
at .05 level
9. Students achievement in science is directly related to
their teachers effectiveness in science teaching
-.09762 .22701 Accept Ho
at .05 level
10. If parents comment that their child is showing more
interest in school, it is because of good performance of
the childs teacher
-.09762 .22701 Accept Ho
at .05 level
11. Given a choice, I would invite the principal to evaluate
my science teaching.
-.11926 .22701 Accept Ho
at .05 level

103

The above table presents the r results on the relationship
between science teaching outcomes expectancy of the teacher
respondents and attendance to in-service training/seminars.
Looking closely at the results reveal that the r value is lower
than the critical value of .22701, hence accepting the null
hypothesis at .05 level.
9.2.7 Test of significant Relationship Between Science Teaching
Outcomes Expectancy and School Assignment

Table 10.2.7

Pearson r Results on the Relationship Between Science Teaching
Outcomes Expectancy and School Assignment

Item r Critical
value .05
Decision
B. Science Teaching Outcomes Expectancy
1. When a student does better than usual in science, it is
often because the teacher exerted much effort
.04440 .22701 Accept Ho
at .05 level
2. When the science grades of the students improve, it is
often due to their teachers having found a more
effective teaching approach..
.02584 .22701 Accept Ho
at .05 level
3. If students are achieving in science, it is most likely due
to effective science teaching.
.00914 .22701 Accept Ho
at .05 level
4. The inadequacy of a students science background can
be overcome by good teaching
-.04708 .22701 Accept Ho
at .05 level
5. The low science achievement of students cannot be
blamed on their teachers
.09768 .22701 Accept Ho
at .05 level
6. When a low-achieving child progresses in science, it is
usually due to extra attention given by the teacher
.03003 .22701 Accept Ho
at .05 level
7. Increased effort in science tecahing produces change in
students science achievement.
-.07611 .22701 Accept Ho
at .05 level
8. The teacher is generally responsible for the
achievement of students in science
.04202 .22701 Accept Ho
104

at .05 level
9. Students achievement in science is directly related to
their teachers effectiveness in science teaching
.14270 .22701 Accept Ho
at .05 level
10. If parents comment that their child is showing more
interest in school, it is because of good performance of
the childs teacher
.20324 .22701 Accept Ho
at .05 level
11. Given a choice, I would invite the principal to evaluate
my science teaching.
.00263 .22701 Accept Ho
at .05 level

The above table reveals that school assignment is not
significantly related to science teaching outcomes expectancy in
all the items, hence the acceptance of the null hypothesis at
.05 level.
This implies that school assignment does not affect
teaching outcomes expectancy

9.2.8 Test of significant Relationship Between Science Teaching
Outcomes Expectancy and Number of Subject Preparations

Table 10.2.8

Pearson r Results on the Relationship Between Science Teaching
Outcomes Expectancy and Number of Subject Preparations

Item r Critical
value .05
Decision
B. Science Teaching Outcomes Expectancy
1. When a student does better than usual in science, it is often
because the teacher exerted much effort
-.06816 .22701 Accept Ho
at .05 level
2. When the science grades of the students improve, it is often
due to their teachers having found a more effective teaching
approach..
-.30578 .22701 Reject Ho
at .05 level
3. If students are achieving in science, it is most likely due to
effective science teaching.
-.22928 .22701 Reject Ho
at .05 level
4. The inadequacy of a students science background can be
overcome by good teaching
-.36582 .22701 Reject Ho
at .05 level
105

5. The low science achievement of students cannot be blamed on
their teachers
-.13322 .22701 Accept Ho
at .05 level
6. When a low-achieving child progresses in science, it is usually
due to extra attention given by the teacher
-.26711 .22701 Reject Ho
at .05 level
7. Increased effort in science tecahing produces change in
students science achievement.
-.15132 .22701 Accept Ho
at .05 level
8. The teacher is generally responsible for the achievement of
students in science
-.19453 .22701 Accept Ho
at .05 level
9. Students achievement in science is directly related to their
teachers effectiveness in science teaching
-.12176 .22701 Accept Ho
at .05 level
10. If parents comment that their child is showing more interest in
school, it is because of good performance of the childs
teacher
.02933 .22701 Accept Ho
at .05 level
11. Given a choice, I would invite the principal to evaluate my
science teaching.
-.28385 .22701 Reject Ho
at .05 level


The above table shows that number of subject preparation is
significantly related to the to the following items: 2, 3, 4, 6,
and 11, thus rejecting the null hypothesis at .05 level.
On the other hand, there is no significant relationship
between the number of subject preparations and items 1, 5, 7, 8,
9, and 10, thus accepting the null hypothesis at .05 level.













106

10. Test of Significant Relationship between the Teaching
Performance of the Teacher Respondents and their profile
variable

Table 11

10.1 Person r results on the Relationship between the
Teaching Performance of the Teacher Respondents and their
profile variable


PAST

PROFILE
r Critical
value
Decision
Age -.11614 .22701 Accept Ho at
.05 level
Gender -.15277 .22701 Accept Ho at
.05 level
Highest Educational Qualification -.12664 .22701 Accept Ho at
.05 level
Number of years in Teaching Science -.21151 .22701 Accept Ho at
.05 level
Attendance to In-Service Trainings and Seminars in
Science
-.26675 .22701 Accept Ho at
.05 level
School Assignment -.05861 .22701 Accept Ho at
.05 level
Number of Subject preparation -.17054 .22701 Accept Ho at
.05 level

The table above presents the r results on the relationship
between the teaching performance of the science teachers and
their profile variables. The data reveals that the r-results
fall short of the critical value of .22701, thus accepting the
bull hypothesis at .05 level. This means that teaching
performance is not significantly related to age, gender, highest
educational qualification, number of years in teaching,
attendance to in-service trainings and seminars in science,
school assignment and number of subject preparation
107

Chapter 5
Summary of Findings, Conclusion and Recommendation
This chapter presents the summary of findings, conclusion
and recommendation of the study.

Summary of findings
1. Profile of the Respondents
The mean age of the respondents is 38.67, majority of the
respondents are female, have finished Master of Arts in
Education. There are 23 of the respondents who are assigned as
Grade III teachers. There are 32 who have 1-5 years teaching
experience. Most of the teachers have attended division in-
service trainings/seminars in science. There are also 36
teachers who have 4 four subject preparations and there are more
teachers in Tuguegarao East Central School.

2. Level of Science Teaching Self Efficiency of the Respondents

2.a The level of science teaching efficacy of the teachers is
high while the school heads rated it as very high.

b. The level of science Teaching Outcomes expectancy was rated
high by the teacher-respondents while the school head rated it
as very high
108

3. Test of significant difference of the assessment of the two
groups of respondents
The administrators/school head rated significantly higher than
the teachers the personal science teaching efficacy and science
teaching outcomes expectancy, hence, rejecting the null
hypothesis at .05 level.

4. Level of the teaching performance of the teacher respondents
as reflected in their PAST
The level of teaching performance of the teacher respondents
as reflected in their PAST is very satisfactory.

5. Test of significant Relationship Between the Science Teaching
Efficacy of the Teacher Respondents and their Teaching
Performance
There is no significant relationship between teaching efficacy
of the teacher respondent and their teaching performance, thus,
the acceptance of the null hypothesis at .05 level.

6. Mean Grade of the Grade 6 pupils in Science

The mean grade of the Grade 6 pupils is 85.68 which means that
pupils are proficient in science.
7. Test of significant relationship Between Teaching Science
Efficiency and the Mean Grade of Pupils
109


The science teaching efficacy does not affect the
performance/grade of the pupils.

8. Test of Relationships Between the Teaching Performance
Of the Teacher-Respondents and the Mean Grade of the Pupils

The teaching performance of the teachers does not affect the
performance of the Grade 6 pupils.

9. Test of significant Relationship Between Personal Science
Teaching Efficacy and Science Teaching Outcomes Expectancy and
their Profile Variables

9.a Science Teaching self-efficacy is not significantly related
to age, educational qualification, number of years teaching
science, in-service trainings and seminars attended in science
and school assignment, However number of subject preparations is
significantly related to science teaching self-efficacy.

9.b Science teaching outcomes expectancy is not significantly
related to highest educational qualifications, Number of years
in service, attendance to in-service trainings/seminars in
school and school assignment, However, age, gender and number of
subject preparations is significantly related to science
teaching outcomes expectancy.
110


Conclusion
Self efficacy influences the teachers on teaching science.
In order to teach effectively, teachers teaching in science
should convey clearly science concepts especially to young minds
in the elementary level. Science self-efficacy of the teachers
significantly affects how teachers lead to the subject as well
as pupils motivation to learn the subject. The competence of
the teacher to help the pupils understand science concepts and
when a low achieving child progresses in science, could be
attributed to extra attention given by teachers and the ability
of the teacher to teach science as well as other subjects truly
affected their self-efficacy.


Recommendations
1. The teachers teaching performance should be improved to
affect teaching efficacy.
2. Teaching science efficacy should be improved to relate to
pupils grades.
3. The teachers should commit themselves to improve the low
achievement of pupils.
4. That the proposed interventions be implemented.